| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
   |
Posted - 2009.10.03 22:55:00 -
[1]
awesome stuff ... one comment though. If a character has no skills trained at level 0 or 1 it comes up with "no data" - instead of 0
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.05 22:18:00 -
[2]
Next to the over all rank number, add the actual average score... Then you can actually see how far behind/ahead you are from the players next to you in rank. More competitive display of the data than just the raw rank :)
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.06 02:24:00 -
[3]
 Originally by: Viggen
The last thing we want is a top ten list full of "Anonymous", but that seems to be the way its heading atm.
Agree. When I saw that I would still get on the lists and stuff while being ranked globally I restricted my profile ... but when I noticed what Viggen is pointing out I took the restriction off.
I am also somewhat skeptical of having wallet info a part of the ranking (don't mind my wallet... always broke ... well at least until I buy those titan skills).
Considering how awesome this site is ... being placed at 1000 doesn't seem such a bad thing for people that are ranked lower than that. Which I guess will happen once you get considerably more than 1000 profiles on your site :)
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.06 15:52:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Chribba
For the time it will remain that way, but if the general direction is a list of 10 anonymous pilots, then I will add the option to either be ranked or not (while having a private sheet) and thus get rid of the anonymous entries.
Thumbs up! 
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.06 23:36:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Ravenal on 06/10/2009 23:36:21
number of lvl 1-5 skills and skill points by lvl 1-5 is "almost" double counting the players that get high scores in either of those lists.
... its at least close enough, players only varying by a few ranks.
So the question is... do players that rank high on nr of skills really need another similar ranking in nr of skill points?
*edit* - should it be there average, secondary ranking by nr of skill points or?
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.07 15:58:00 -
[6]
Originally by: Chribba
That should change when I change the sorting to overall rank instead of most sp as secondary sorting.
really? It's still a double count of the same "ranking" ... or close enough. I mean, I get ranked because I have lots of skills at lvl 1 which also means I am likely to be ranked high in skill points from lvl 1 skills (which I am too)
The reason for those two "different" groups is of course the different ranks of skills, so it might be easy to have lots of level 5 skills but not many skill points from those skills while another player might have few level 5 skills but lots of skill points. Very understandable distinction. At lower levels this difference is ... not easily distinguishable though.
... anyway, just an observation. I'm perfectly fine with keeping it the way it is ... better for my ranking anyway :)
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.07 21:09:00 -
[7]
Originally by: Amateratsu
Your stats have jumped a bit Ravenal
9,728,000 in learning
186 million in lv5 skills
736 total skills
39.6 ap in perception
The list goes on...
You been Haxoring eveboard or something?
Or bribing Chribba with lots of veldspar?
eh what? ... i'd like those stats please yes :D
... but no, can't see how I can mess up the API like that?!?
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.07 22:49:00 -
[8]
Edited by: Ravenal on 07/10/2009 22:51:06
Originally by: Amateratsu
lol must have been a tempory glitch, back to normal now:)
Or theres a conspiricy going which has been hastilly covered up
just finally some credit to the jack of all trades skill training \o/
... i'm just enjoying the sweet nr 1 life until chribba fixes the no data bug for not having any skills trained at x level. Expecting Tripoli to wipe the floor with the jack of all trades rankings when his no data categories clear up :)
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.08 17:11:00 -
[9]
Edited by: Ravenal on 08/10/2009 17:16:53
Originally by: Chribba
That's fixed? If you got an example sheet pls link it so I understand the problem correctly.
http://eveboard.com/pilot/Tripoli/ranks
+ Number of Level 1 skills
Ranked
-
(no data)
+ Number of untrained skills
Ranked
-
(no data)
+ Most SP by Lv1 skills
Ranked
-
(no data)
instead of
Ranked
X
(0)
*edit*... which when there are more than 1000 people signed up will be worse than the - (you said that no data categories were ranked as 1000 somewhere?)
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 02:52:00 -
[10]
Originally by: Drahcir Nasom
... but he happened to sign up on the website before me.
Thats not it, secondary ordering is by global rank. Used to be skillpoints... but global rank is fairest for all.
What to do with empty categories... it's tricky as the all skills at lvl5 example proves. The only thing I can think of is another category where you get ranked higher the fewer sps you have to train the skills you have to lvl5.
Honestly if you are going to have those nr of lvl1 skills etc... there is no better way to handle it than currently.
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 15:46:00 -
[11]
hmm... does global rank actually work for the "no data" categories?
well, sure but only if you can't close access to a particular category (like implants) and just get your global ranking for the attributes.
... which I tested and found out that I could do to increase my global rank (reset after test)
= being able to hide stuff to increase your rank == bad bad :(
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 21:30:00 -
[12]
expecting drachir support now that someone has picked up on the hidden "bug" to beef her way up to 1st rank ;)
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 21:44:00 -
[13]
Right, this is the deal. You'd want someone who has all skills at lvl5 to be ranked nr 1 right?
This means that he's ranked lowest in nr of skills for lvl0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 skills AS well as skillpoints for lvl0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 skills. This brings up my previous comments about this "double counting" of nr/skillpoints for each level of skill.
As far as I understand these categories are to give "new" players some chance at ranking ... at all in which case those categories need to be counted properly or not at all, otherwise the global rank just becomes a play with the mechanics of the count.
... addition suggestion: link to "full list" from characters profile > pilot ranks
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.19 22:51:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Amateratsu
Sooner or later we are all gonna have to train our skills up to higher levels, and i don't think we should be penalised for doing so...
no, I am a skillho. I like having for example doomsday operation but i havent the slightest interest in getting it to lvl1.
imo I think non lvl5 skill categories should not be categories at all... but if they are gonna stay there then there is only one correct way to count them... otherwise you are cheating players that do want those skills there for a reason.
If those categories stay, and you want go get a high global rank ... then I guess you have a reason to train skills in those categories to get a better rank.
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 01:10:00 -
[15]
Originally by: Amateratsu
Your currently on 382 out 390 skills, your going to reach a point where you have no other skills availlable other than the level 0 - 3's.
You gonna stop training at that point and wait for more skills to be added to the game? or train up those lower level skills?
On another note, a link to the full catagory list from your pilot ranks would be very usefull
I'll continue training of course. I'm not leaving those lvl 0 - 3s because of some oog epeen site, I'm not training them atm because they don't fit my plan.
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 16:39:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Chribba
Also what could be made from the standings, is to calculate a value based on the actual standing as well Eg having higher dosperado would get calculated like (Rank*10)/9.00, thus his points added for that category would be like 1*10/9 => 1.11 points, as per some other random guy who has maybe like 2.12 standing (358*10)/2.12 (if his rank was 358) = 1688.68 points would be added to his score. Or anything in those lines?
If I understand you correctly this would widen the gap between players in favor of higher ranked chars? ... Standings rank should just use faction standings and normal ordering, 0.0 standings if none exist for that faction just as no data should be 0.
In the case of lvl 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 skills having no data... a "penalty" is fairer than ranking at bottom. IMO it should be a good thing to have no skills at those levels with reduced "chances" of that being the case for higer lvl skills.
Also you cant hide that so no one is cheating there. So... I suggest that having "no data" for lvl 0 skills = 10 point penalty, lvl1 = 50 point penalty, lvl2 = 100, lvl3 = 500 and lvl4 = 1000... or dynamically placing the player lower. like assume no data for lvl 0 = 10% from top, lvl1 = 20% from top... etc.
This means it's a "good" thing to have no data for low level skills, but not the "best" thing. Penalizing the other categories (the ones that can be hidden and whole skill categories, like subsystems) by 1000 is fine.
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.20 16:54:00 -
[17]
Originally by: RaTTuS
The average SP / member in the corps section is a bit meh!
Yeh, is there no way to get how many people are in the corp total?
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 14:24:00 -
[18]
sweet! me and a corpie in 1 and 2
rattus trailing by the width of his hair!
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 16:40:00 -
[19]
Originally by: RaTTuS
:-P
yea been trying to get a few basic cert's
also been debating with myself about splurging on titan skills,
I'm doing the most boring training plan ever, finishing up the bloody charisma skills - then remapping and never looking back to charisma.
... the titan skills are like 66 months of plex's ... play and fun vs titan skills :S
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.22 20:54:00 -
[20]
Originally by: Tripoli
Nah, y'all don't need 'em. Too many people (2) already have all skills trained. You don't want to be the third wheel, right? 
I'm being a lazy boy... don't even have all race freighter skills
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.23 00:07:00 -
[21]
Originally by: Viggen
Sorry Trip, your mistaken, 3 people have all the skills... I am now one of them "Current skills: 390 (skill points: 103,504,522)" So that makes me the third wheel.
its a crowd!
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.23 15:34:00 -
[22]
Originally by: Chribba
So now I changed it to only calculate overall rank based upon;
Skillpoints, Number of skills, Number of Lv5, 4 and 3 skills, all individual skill category (mechanic, industry etc), number of certificates, number of elite certificates, ISK and skill value.
... wait, what exactly is being counted. If I tally up the points I have for sp, nr skills, nr of lvl5, 4 and 3 skills, skill categories, certs, isk and skill value I get a final score of 48 or so. Not the 80 I have now.
Then again Valrandir also has a lower score (45ish) - so I am wondering what categories I am missing? (included all certificate categories)
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.23 16:52:00 -
[23]
Originally by: Valrandir
Not hiding my wallet made a big difference \O/
First place, for now.
yeah, you have a huge lead (almost 20 points over 2nd and 3rd) which makes me think that there is some residue values or something that are calculated into my points. A quick calculation of the categories Chribba mentioned yields 45 points for you and 48 points for me, or so.
something buggy in cache land?
Not expecting to grab #1 again any time soon, my skill plan is very hostile to the ranking system there :D
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.24 16:45:00 -
[24]
just an observation; certificate categories "should" be certificate levels ...
which brings me to a question: is it possible to get #certs in certificate categories (x many certs in starter professions ...)
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.10.26 22:39:00 -
[25]
oi Val, where did you go?
Error report:
Quote:
ADODB.Field error '800a0bcd'
Either BOF or EOF is True, or the current record has been deleted. Requested operation requires a current record.
/scripts/myranks.asp, line 15
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2009.11.07 00:41:00 -
[26]
I still think people shouldn't be punished too harshly for having "no data" in categories like level 3 or even level 4 skills. People start out with those skills or get them very quickly. Not sure what the penalty for those categories is atm... but considering for example Drachir that only has lvl4 and lvl5 skills... you should def not be penalized for wanting to train all skills to level 5.
If you only have a small subset of all skills anyway at lvl5 you are scoring badly in the categories of skills you don't have ... so you wouldn't be stealing any global ranks based only on the no data ranks in lvl3 or lvl4 skills.
. |
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.02.02 13:11:00 -
[27]
Something for the ToDo list?
Certificate points:
Nr of skillpoints covered by certificates
Non-certificate points:
nr of skillpoints not covered by certificates
Someone was talking in another thread about "easy" to get certificates vs "hard" to get ... I don't know if it will matter much but you would be one of the few that could pull that data :)
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.02.11 17:40:00 -
[28]
Originally by: Chribba
Also, in a character comparison function, what things do you want to have compared? At the moment only the skill list is shown. But I assume you all are looking for other things as well, like ranks etc So throw me your ideas on waht you're looking for in that function.
Side by side skills with +/- column quickly displaying the difference in levels between the characters being compared (1st - 2nd) and a total +/- at the bottom
Same side by side rank comparison for:
- all ranked categories
- ranked categories that are scored (for global rank)
Same side by side for certificates
Possibly for ship, offensive and defensive skills too. This would work out something like:
Character1 - character2
ship1 - ship1 // +2 (where comparison is the skill levels required to fly that ship
ship2 - ship2 ...
Offensive skills:
projectiles (capital, large, medium, small)
energy turrets (capital, large, medium, small)
hybrid turrets (capital, large, medium, small)
drones (fighters, heavy, medium, small)
missiles (capital, large, medium, small)
Defensive skills:
shield tanking (capital, sub-capital)
armor tanking (capital, sub-capital)
Speed
... possibly lots of work to create the skill groups. Most of it would be in the certificates too, but it's a comfy collection for comparing?
... just ideas like you asked for
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.02.12 12:58:00 -
[29]
Originally by: Chribba
Progress and example of the comparison - as it looks now - Linkage
awesome
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.02.21 23:25:00 -
[30]
Originally by: Drykor
If you could get CCP to include the character date of birth in the api (or is it already?), you could put that info on the character page as well, you could even do nifty calculations such as average SP/month or SP/minute
somewhat pointless calculations considering how learning skills, implants and remaps have been gradually added ... it'll result in some equally "efficiently" trained alts at the top.
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.03.22 00:02:00 -
[31]
Originally by: Tripoli
- Add new rankings: Number of ships you can fly, and number of blueprints you can use.
would those be good categories for the global rank?
thumbs up on all those suggestions though ... think I even had that link suggestion way back in the thread :(
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.04.02 16:29:00 -
[32]
so, you adding nr of ships flown to the ranks page and global ranking calculation? ;)
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.04.04 01:31:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Kalanar
I would like to note that Chribba is not on Chribba's site. o.O
It's because all characters using that site actually donate 1 unit of veldspar a day to Chribba ... if he had his character on that it would create an infinite loop and plunge the world into a veld hole (similar to a black hole but bigger ... less mass but more volume)
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.08.27 11:35:00 -
[34]
- add a small icon or something in the heading of all categories that are used for global ranking
?
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.09.29 03:12:00 -
[35]
congrats \o/ ... this site was truly a gem for the Eve community when launched :)
one quick q ... I've never had my "Highest Average Faction Standing" showing, it's always been "no data". Not sure why because my "Lowest Avg. Faction Standing" is showing just fine.
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.09.29 12:45:00 -
[36]
Originally by: Chribba
As for not showing in Highest - it is because you're showing in Lowest (if my memory serves me right atm). There would be no real point in being listed in both as either list would just be the same as the other - with the sorting reversed.
/c
Like for security status?
Might I suggest then to have instead of highest/lowest faction standings, have empire/pirate faction standings? ... and changing the current one to a single rank of "total faction standings"?
Rav
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.10.03 19:51:00 -
[37]
Originally by: Mashie Saldana
I have no idea how I can end up with more points here for example.
Subsystems?
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.10.05 20:50:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Chribba
First the ranks, (!) has been added to the categories that used in the calculations (there are currently 30 of them being used).
Awesome addition :)
Originally by: Chribba
Most ISK
uhm, why?
Originally by: Chribba
On comparing pilots the skill level determines the points, valued at the following:
Lv1 = 1
Lv2 = 3
Lv3 = 6
Lv4 = 10
Lv5 = 15
And as always I'm more than happy to discuss any formula changes or ideas to get better (more fair) ranks.
Why are skill ranks not included? like:
Lv1 = 1 * skill rank
Lv2 = 3 * skill rank
...
Also, with the certificates... you don't lose your basic certificates if you train all up to elite, like skills... ?
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.10.06 13:39:00 -
[39]
Originally by: MegabitOne
Lv1 = 15
Lv2 = 10
Lv3 = 6
Lv4 = 3
Lv5 = 1
so... comparing a particular skill between two players. One has level 1 and the other has level 2 ... the one with level 1 wins with 15 points? Or are you saying that the level 2 player actually has 25 points?
Your diminishing returns are "the wrong way around" ... yes, we spend more time to get that x% from level 4 to 5 than you did from lvl3 to 4. But because you spent more time it's also worth more when you compare.
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.10.06 14:49:00 -
[40]
Ok, lets take a look at that. Purely counting skillpoints, like this:
(cps = current point system, sp = skillpoints)
A B = cps - sp
1 4 = b+9 - b+45005
1 4 = b+9 - b+45005
1 4 = b+9 - b+45005
1 4 = b+9 - b+45005
5 1 = a+14 - a+255750
... = b+22 - a+75730
This means that with the current system B has 22 more points than A but A has 75730 more skill points (assuming all rank 1 skills). But which IS better ... the 11115 or 44441? Well, it'll take A a VERY short amount of time to get 33335, during which B will have 44444. So this might be a better comparison point:
A B
3 4 = b+4 - b+37255
3 4 = b+4 - b+37255
3 4 = b+4 - b+37255
3 4 = b+4 - b+37255
5 4 = a+5 - a+210745
... = b+11 - a+61725
yes, the number of skills I use in my example matters. But let's say all other skills are the same. These are the differences. In one case the current point system wins while in the other skillpoints win. Now IMO the first system is inaccurate (If that level 5 skill is of higher ranks for example) and the other system is unfair (too biased towards just having lots of skill points).
So, in pure terms of effectiveness the system should just be points = skill level * rank. That's how Eve measures effectiveness anyway. So, lvl4 rank 3 skill = 12 points. That level 4 skill might give you +20% something, that's how effective you are. That means:
A B
3 4 = b+1
3 4 = b+1
3 4 = b+1
3 4 = b+1
5 4 = a+1, change this to rank 4 skill = a+4
... = b+3, a=b ... in terms of effectiveness + cost to get effective.
Originally by: Ravenal
Also, with the certificates... you don't lose your basic certificates if you train all up to elite, like skills... ?
Yes you do, perhaps basic (and standard) should be removed from calculations?
That would mean it would be optimal to always leave one certificate out on each level. Ignore one branch of certificates from basic to elite to not just get the default rank penalty.
Another thing with the character comparison ... I somewhat expected the comparison would be between the ranks of each player in the groups used on the site. Is that something worth looking at in addition (like a new page to the comparision ... Comparison: Skills - Ships - Ranks
o7
Rav
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.12.03 21:11:00 -
[41]
Originally by: RaTTuS
umm
OK to the 17 above me .. how do I make my full ranks go up .....
I've been training skills to level 3 now for a bit .. but I just seem to hover at the same place, or even drop a bit... 
there must be something I can do ...
o7 ... train: drones, electronics, engineering, industry, missiles, navigation, pi, social and subsystems... all categories are below average for you ;)
But all joke aside ... I've also been wondering about that fluctuation stuff (having about the same average number of points as you). I guess pilots with more points fluctuate even more.
It's got something to do with sorting by global rank right? You've gotta generate all the ranks for all the categories ... then reorder based on global rank which calculates to a new global rank that again has impact on the reordering?
Would it be easier to give ties equal points (the average of the places they occupy)? So players tied at 1-10 will have an average of 5.5 points in that category...? That means less shuffling around in the global rank which I guess is kinda costly to rewrite all the time.
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.12.04 01:43:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Amateratsu
Its not so much the sorting that causes the flutuations, but new pilots joining EB, Old Pilots leaving or not renewing their subs ect.
Your global score is basicly the sum total of your scores in each of the ranked catagorys / the number of catagorys that count towards the global rank.
When new pilots join EB who rank better in 1 or more catagorys than you do, they will push you down the ranks for that catagory which in turn effects your global rank.
If you then put training into say Drones for example, you will move up that catagory overtaking other pilots who are training something else and that will improve your global score.
So as you can see, fluctuations are the nature of EB, changing the way the ranks are sorted for pilots who have maxed out a catagory will not stop the fluctuations.
Yes, that's the basics of it... fluctuations among those ranked highest shouldn't happen that often though. Sure there are some categories that those high ranked people don't have trained so good compared to others but what RaTTuS was talking about (I think) and I too was mainly the fluctuations in points ... going up and down in points over a short period of time while not training a category that chances internal ranking.
Only from memory but while training spaceship command (where I'm ranked fairly highly and thus will only move a rank or two at most given a day of training, if that much) my points have jumped up and down about a hundred points. My only guess for that was some ordering being redone because of the global ranking as secondary ordering.
Possibly quite a few characters joined in and bumped my score up and down and then quit or something ... but I find that unlikely. Joining yes, quitting no. So my average score should have dropped and stayed that way. Unfortunately I don't have any screenshots of this so I'm just going to have to take my memory for it.
anyway, thought RaTTuS was talking about those fluctuations.
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.12.16 01:49:00 -
[43]
remove them as soon (pool up possibly) as you fail to get api information because they are inactive but keep the api information and poll that every now and then to check for activity?
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.12.17 21:00:00 -
[44]
Originally by: Nertzius
The reason I am interested in rankings versus inactive players is to know how well I am progressing towards passing older players whom were once more skilled than I was. It's a very slow process to catch and pass active players.
Could be interesting to keep a thumb print of inactive players ... That table would have low activity and a much smaller size than the whole sheet. Of course that's a "big" feature to add in terms code maintenance and things that can go wrong. The interesting part like you say would be to see the skillpoint demographics of inactive vs active players (which you can pull out now but with all the data load of the inactives).
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.12.20 19:38:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Amateratsu
It actually pays in some cases to have no rank and a fixed 1k penalty in various catagory's to improve your global rank, which is not a good reflection on how well you've trained, or how the ranking should work.
This works for certificates so it should work fine for skill levels too... this isn't a nerf for lower skillpoint players even but it is a boost for people that have more skills ... but all in all it equals out because more skills = less points per skill average.
\o/ from me...
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2010.12.21 17:48:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Mashie Saldana
I'm all for this even though I probably will get penalised at less than 200 skills in total.
I guess you are thoroughly enjoying your skill points per skill though :¦
Granted though that there will be 6 categories (lvl1-5 ... not expecting lvl0 ... and number of skills) vs sp/skill. Possibly have that weigh more or just tell those low (skills) lives (honored specialized pilots) to suck it up and cross train! :)
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2011.03.18 15:29:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Viggen
Treat the "Number of skills" ranks the same as "Number of certificates" ranks.
+1
Also a rank for:
- % of ships you can fly
- % of items you can use
- % of blueprints you can use
?
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2011.04.12 00:46:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Juwi Kotch
Chribba, something is awfully wrong with my ranking under "highest skill value". Pilots with a fifth my skillpoints and less then half my number of skills rank thousands of positions better then me. Could you please take a look?
Thank you,
buy some expensive skills like the capital ships ones and you'll be all fixed up.
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2011.04.18 14:51:00 -
[49]
One (well one type) of interesting chart that might be a good addition to statistics. If you click a skill group you could show the amounts of skill points each "rank" has. Basically plot from lowest skill point to highest skill point.
It could be interesting because you might spot plateaus in the skill categories and thus see whats "normal" level of skill points for each group and where advanced number of skill points starts kicking in. Or if it's just a slow progression from 0 to max :)
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2011.05.30 19:15:00 -
[50]
Originally by: Chribba
I'm all open for suggestions on how to handle the ranks and all, but it's not an straight forward thing. Same goes for calculating the global rank etc.
I'd love to find a way that makes the overall ranks move more based on what a pilot actually do with their skills/isk/standings etc, eg to have them work for their #1 spot (in some categories) compared to passive high-ranking just because you have fortunate stats.
One thing always bothered me, while the current comparison system is great and all ... I always assumed it should use the player ranks. Compare ranks that is. Currently you can have two players where player A is ranked higher than player B but player B gets more points in player comparison.
Experiment with more global ranking options, like:
- Top Gun, ... (based on skill primary/secondary attributes).
- Top Jack (based on % of skillpoints over total nr of skillpoints for the group over total skill points ... or something. Meaning if you've got a perfect 1/skillgroups% points in each skill group you are top Jack)
- ...
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2011.06.17 04:44:00 -
[51]
Edited by: Ravenal on 17/06/2011 04:45:00
Originally by: Dr Caymus
It's been decades since I programmed... Fortran guy with a stack of punch cards here... so have no clue on what the resource requirements of such functionality would be though.
Well, if you throw in a tiny bit of extra data to each rank you can actually do it client side with some javascript filtering.
Like, client enters "custom" ranking mode and asks for a combination of:
- DoB
- Bloodline
- Gender
- ... restrict based on current query architecture.
Now "all" you need to do is apply the filter function on the browser by checking some boxes for the available options of each category or set a date. Like, "check Ni-Kunni, male, DoB last 2 years.
So "normal" mode would just stay the same, the custom mode is just some DOM manipulation.
Edit: tradeoff for extra query filtering time on server is bandwidth for the extra values... so, whatever suit fits.
.
|
Ravenal
The Fated
E.Y
|
Posted - 2011.08.24 21:08:00 -
[52]
Originally by: ZackWildMiner
Nice to see the implants for slots 1-5 but sometimes the slot 6-10 implants are the more important ones.....
Not for skills ...
.
|
| |
|